| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/21/2006 04:25:53 PM · #26 |
[quote]i call this a great deal, i'm sure the sigma will do it's job perfectly good [/quote]
ordered from //www.bhphotovideo.com should be here tomorrow. |
|
|
|
03/24/2006 12:47:17 PM · #27 |
First time out with the new sigma 10-22mm. Notice my tripod leg in the bottom right corner, I am definatly not used to a lens this wide. |
|
|
|
03/24/2006 01:02:59 PM · #28 |
| Congrats with new super wide angle! I'm sure you'll be very happy with it. |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 08:16:39 PM · #29 |
So glad you guys brought this thread back up. Perfect timing. i hit the big Three Oh this weekend, and am encouraging my wife to go for the 10-22.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 05:27:30 PM · #30 |
Canon EF-S 10-22mm for $689.95 at amazon
Is it great deal or the price has came down. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 07:33:18 PM · #31 |
| If you want less lens distortion (IE Fisheye) go with the Canon it has less than any other on the market. I personally love this lens was the second lens I got. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 07:57:55 PM · #32 |
I kinda like the 10-20 myself. ;-)
|
|
|
|
11/21/2006 07:41:29 AM · #33 |
I'm going to ressurect this thread for a bit. I know its old, but rather then start another thread on it this is better. I wonder if someone can tell me something. I rented the Canon 10-22 and stopped down this thing is sharp. But if you go wide open its soft and not very good. Can anyone tell me if this is normal for this lens to be soft wide open or if this is a bad copy. I have heard several people say that its a great lens stopped down and thats what I'm finding once I get past 5.6 or so its great but at 3.5-4.5 its very soft. Which makes it not so good for lower light non flash group shots.
MattO
|
|
|
|
11/21/2006 07:48:08 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by MattO:
I'm going to ressurect this thread for a bit. I know its old, but rather then start another thread on it this is better. I wonder if someone can tell me something. I rented the Canon 10-22 and stopped down this thing is sharp. But if you go wide open its soft and not very good. Can anyone tell me if this is normal for this lens to be soft wide open or if this is a bad copy. I have heard several people say that its a great lens stopped down and thats what I'm finding once I get past 5.6 or so its great but at 3.5-4.5 its very soft. Which makes it not so good for lower light non flash group shots.
MattO |
That's pretty normal for any extreme WA lens. It will perform best for you around f/8 to f/11.
R. |
|
|
|
11/21/2006 08:19:05 AM · #35 |
| Yes it can definitely give results that appear soft, but you can also use it to get some pin sharp images. In fact I think it's quite an interesting lens because of the variation in results. |
|
|
|
11/21/2006 08:04:31 PM · #36 |
Thanks Bear and Mist you confirmed what I had pretty much decided. THis lens isnt so good for low light, stopping down to the sharp range requires alot of lot or alot of ISO. Not exactly what I would want a wide angle to do for me. Glad I rented and didnt buy right off the bat. I wonder if there is a better alternative to really wide then this.
MattO
|
|
|
|
11/21/2006 09:29:39 PM · #37 |
My 10-22 is sharp in daylight shooting, non-landscape.
I tried some night landscape shots, and, well, crap, absolute crap. (looked like camera shake except at the lower edge where the foregound was sharp - shot ffrom a tripod so i know it wasn't shake). I tried 3.5 to f16.
I posted this over at the FM canon forum and got lots of responses that said the 30D (and most all dSLRs especially the APS sensor ones) suffer from issues with smaller aps - smaller than F11, and this is worse on wide angle lenses as the light is coming from more obtuse angles.
Indoor shots from it are very sharp.
|
|
|
|
11/21/2006 09:43:02 PM · #38 |
Interesting. Even though I really like the Sigma lenses (I own three of them) I went, without hesitation, to the 10-22 Canon and have never regretted it. It's always in my bag.
I wonder how the OP,  phinbob, likes his Canon now that he's had it for a few months.
Do you still have this thread on "Watch"? Phinbob? |
|
|
|
11/21/2006 10:36:23 PM · #39 |
For those looking for a wide lens that will do well in night landscape service, try out the Canon 15mm fisheye. On an APS-C camera, it's not really that fishy at all, and can easily be defished, if required. It's razor sharp, and is still pretty damn sharp wide open. These two challenge entries:
 
were shot with the 15 fish on a 10D (on the same evening) and were *not* defished. Here is another shot with the 15 fish/10D combination. You can click on the image, then click the "O" above the image to load the original size.
Edit: Note that all these images were shot wide open :-)
Message edited by author 2006-11-21 22:38:23. |
|
